Welcome to wikiFeet.
Top uploaders
Last 30 days
All time
ToothpickTorture - 7892
(1.39% reported)
celebs - 3448
(0.73% reported)
Kawen Mr Jeyt - 1180
(0.51% reported)
doc03 - 985
(1.12% reported)
Shadow20 - 899
(2.00% reported)
disclaimer
privacy statement


Jennifer Aniston

  (Go to IMDb page)
Shoe Size: 7 US edit
Nationality: United States edit
Rating stats (4823 total votes)
3578
beautiful
599
nice
327
ok
118
bad
201
ugly

Rating:
 (gorgeous feet)
You Rated:  
 (click to rate)
Email me on new:   Pictures   Wall Posts  
+options
∨ Skip down to wall ∨

more info1099 pictures were removed from this gallery.

People who liked Jennifer Aniston's feet, also liked:
Natalie Portman
Ariel Winter
Victoria Justice
Kylie Jenner
Riley Reid
Got anymore Jennifer Aniston Feet Pictures? Upload Here
∧ Jump back to top ∧
Celebrity wall
The revised comment section is intended for intellectual discussions over symmetry and aesthetics.
Vulgar, hateful or sexually explicit comments have no place on this site. In short - stay classy ;)
* Enforced by the trust guild more info

2016-05-04 23:31:09Bengt1956  (user)
This image is mirror reversed.
 
Reply
Blacklist user
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-05-04 23:52:26
Beats the snot outta having two right feet, doesn't it?

http://pics.wikifeet.com/Cobie-Smulders-Feet-1301066.jpg
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-05-05 00:01:57
Also far preferable to having a marshmallow for a head:

http://pics.wikifeet.com/Ana-Hickmann-Feet-1698295.jpg
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-05-04 23:41:00SoftSolesSeeker  (user)  -  rated (ok feet)
#FlipFlopPop
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-05-03 12:04:07jojo1520  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Gosh, her soles are very stunning, shes my favourite
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-05-01 03:39:47Templar97  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Gah damn!!


I got nothing (or do I?)...
 
Reply
Blacklist user
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (nice feet)2016-05-01 04:19:55
My! My!😻
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-30 11:48:00absent  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
hail the queen
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-04-23 05:47:58  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Did they Photoshop out 'Norman' (her dead dog's name) or do I see just barely the edge of the tattoo (inside/arch of right foot).

I notice in the new uploads from the People Magazine photoshoot, they tried to conceal it via the poses.
 
Reply
Blacklist user
Toesnheels  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-27 15:26:40
I think I can see the top edge of the tatto, but there's definitely some terrible photoshopping to the top of her left foot!
Blacklist user
Reply
SlimJim  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-27 15:58:19
Yep, zoom in on the R arche of 2215178. The black outline is clear.
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-23 05:31:34LongWalk  (trusted uploader)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Merged the two versions of the pic currently on the site and removed the text... on my way to making this my Windows wallpaper as I, excitedly, mentioned before. Thanks to the uploaders of the original images.
 
Reply
Blacklist user
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-23 05:49:10
Nice job. I usually prefer the 'original' magazine version (I'm just weird that way!), but it's definitely cool to have this 'clean' one also. Thanks, @LongWalk - good work!
Blacklist user
Reply
LongWalk  (trusted uploader)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-23 15:44:45
Thanks! I don't usually bother unless I'm making a wallpaper, and this one turned out beautifully.
Blacklist user
Reply
Toesnheels  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-26 22:31:40
Beautiful indeed, but to use it as wallpaper I'd have to move a few icons from the left side of my screen so they don't obscure the objects of my affection!
Blacklist user
Reply
DantéInExile  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-26 23:02:19
It would be a good choice.
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-23 12:22:10THAgodfather55  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
That has to be one of the best pic's I've ever seen
79/10
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-04-22 19:53:40keeper 2.0  (user)
Damn!!!!
 
Reply
Blacklist user
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 19:55:56
One of the prettier pics of Jennifer aniston!
Blacklist user
Reply
keeper 2.0  (user)2016-04-22 20:08:12
I'm not a huge fan of her feet. But can't deny those soles.
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:09:59
There are better pics deeper in her gallery!
Blacklist user
Reply
joker777  (user)2016-04-22 20:10:45
Indeed, Keepa.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:11:10
"If you've seen one sole, you've seen 'em all."
~L1NGUS
Blacklist user
Reply
keeper 2.0  (user)2016-04-22 20:14:08
I've heard that before. I disagree.
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:14:36
L1NGUS blah!
Blacklist user
Reply
Kranz  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:17:09
Each individual pair of soles are unique.
Blacklist user
Reply
joker777  (user)2016-04-22 20:18:03
Indeed.
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:22:34
Yes Soles are like snowflakes!
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:23:51
@Kranz>"Each individual pair of soles are unique." I saw a "Forensic Files" where this dum-bass took off his socks to put on his hands to murder everyone in the house, but left bloody bare footprints, not realizing they're as unique as finger/handprints!
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:25:09
That's cool!
Blacklist user
Reply
joker777  (user)2016-04-22 20:29:18
Pretty sure I seen that episode. Dumbass tried to rob them I think. Hope he likes cement walls if he's still alive...
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:33:47
@Joker- Yeah, he was like their next-door neighbor too. Dumb AND lazy. Wanted money for crack, so he killed three teenagers.
Blacklist user
Reply
joker777  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:34:52
Sad.
Blacklist user
Reply
Illuminati star  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:46:36
What about a dirtbag he is!
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-22 20:29:55joker777  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Removed: Duplicate
Droolz. Towel!
 
Reply
Blacklist user
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 20:38:47
Jeniffer aniston feet era looking great in these pics!
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-22 14:57:29gilmour-waters  (user)  -  rated (nice feet)
Probably the best sole shot of her ever!
 
Reply
Blacklist user
SlimJim  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 15:22:16
I haven't gone through the 19 pages of the gallery, but that's about as good as it can get.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 15:34:47
@Footsie- You probably have your Ghosts turned on.

And I'm fairly confident any picture of Jen would turn on even a ghost!

(In 1980, Demi Moore turned on the "Ghost" of Patrick Swayze!)
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 15:54:02
It's important to remember to turn them off temporarily if you're posting for people to "justify a report on Page xx"
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-22 12:19:48soleskisser22  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Amazing feet and soles of Jennifer Aniston..!! From the people's magazine Photoshoot..!!
Gorgeous feet and soles..
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-04-22 04:57:03Holly Willoughby's Footslave  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Breathtaking.... everyones favourite new Picture on here :D

can't wait for A HQ version to appear!
 
Reply
Blacklist user
Silver89  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 05:50:26
unfortunately the video is from the official channel of People magazine, and has 720p resolution. i don't think that this video will ever have 1080p resolution
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-21 22:28:50Silver89  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
soles at 1.12
 
Reply
Blacklist user
Rafaleux  (user)2016-04-22 00:30:25
Thank you!
Blacklist user
Reply
Toesnheels  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 01:16:32
And that goes for me, too!
Blacklist user
Reply
Silver89  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 05:47:04
;)
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-02-21 03:45:55TJGollinger  (user)  -  rated (ok feet)
Removed: No Feet Showing
An ol' tip of the hat to @whyfeet for uploading this breakdown of why a pic should be allowed. This is a first for Ol' Teej.

Unfortunately it's wrong, as said arches are not visible through her knee-highs, just like her toes.
 
Reply
Blacklist user
JamieLikesFeet  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-21 03:54:45
I agree with him/her. An arch is a shape; you don't need to be able to see her skin to see her arch. In fact, that's one of the better pictures I've seen showing of Jen's arches.
Blacklist user
Reply
TheGoodFootCritic  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-21 04:04:07
This website is still not wikisocks. Here's my opinion, and it's just an opinion: for a part of the foot to be visible, like the toes or the arches, you need to be able to see both flesh and shape. That, at least to me, explains why blurry and lo res pictures aren't allowed, because you can't really discern shape despite skin being visible. And it's why socks and nylons with a high thread count aren't allowed, because you can't really see the skin despite the shape being visible.
Blacklist user
Reply
JamieLikesFeet  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-21 04:49:58
@TheGoodFootCritic If that's the case then "no socks/nylons allowed" needs to be clearly stated in the guidelines. The fact that it's not suggests that there's currently an openness as long as the photo meets at least one of the other prerequisites, and that (now removed) photo was a perfect example. There's absolutely no denying that her arches were visible in that photo, which means there's either a problem with the community, or there's a problem with the guidelines...
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-21 05:35:29
@JLF- Well, it really sort of is:
► All uploaded pictures must show toes, soles or arches. If they don't, please report them as "No feet". Shoes and ►socks aren't really what wikiFeet is about.◄

Those who have been here any length of time know that this means essentially what @TGFC has stated. However, a revision of the Site Rules is in process for 'sometime in the future' with both a simple bullet point version (similar to what is currently on the Home Page) for those with short attention spans, and a longer version with more detail for the nit-picky & persnickety types. We'll be certain to lay out the 'sheer vs. opaque' hosiery guideline whenever that is posted.
Blacklist user
Reply
JamieLikesFeet  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-21 11:35:09
@BackInBlack60 The obvious contradiction there is the fact that it also says shoes don't really belong here, but yet over 90% of all the pictures on the entire site contain shoes; a lot of which are showing only a few pixels of the celeb's little toenail through the peep toe. Pictures like that get a big fat thumbs up, whilst pictures that clearly display the shape of the foot are immediately removed if there's a thin layer of material covering the skin, despite the fact that skin is certainly not mentioned in the guidelines as something that needs to be visible - and nor should it. You can learn more about Jen's feet from that picture than you can from the majority of these run-of-the-mill red carpet shots.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-21 22:48:10
Dude, I'm done. Not our rules. Use 'Contact Us' in upper left corner and take it up with the Admin.

I personally *hate* the ones showing one toenail from under a dress, jeans or in peep-toe shoes that show *nothing* else. But, the site rules say they're allowed. They do *not* get a thumbs-up from me. But people delete shots with gaping arch showing, all day long. Get a lawyer. Sue the site for wrongful upload removal. You just want to argue. Take it up with Mr Hate- he'll tell you how the horse bites the cabbage. I'm done here.
Blacklist user
Reply
Mr Hate  (guild ambassador)  -  rated (ugly feet)2016-02-21 23:38:41
Rules are rules here on wikiFeet. Just follow them. It is simple folks and if you can't follow them than you have proven the simplest of tasks here are far to complex for you.
Blacklist user
Reply
JamieLikesFeet  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 01:38:54
Just because you can't refute my point doesn't mean I just want to argue. I'm not asking you to reply, I'm just stating my opinion. It's fine if you have no argument against it, but there's no need for the passive aggression.

An arch is a shape. The guidelines state that a picture must contain either the sole, the toes or the arch. You can clearly see the arch in some sock pictures. The guidelines advise us that shoe/sock pictures are not really permitted. But what you're all saying is that shoe pictures are fine as long as the arch or the toes are visible. So my question is, why isn't that the case for sock pictures too?

If shoe pictures that show off the arches are okay, then why are sock pictures that show off the arches not okay?

Really eager to see if someone can specifically answer that question.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 01:58:39
@JLF- I have *plenty* of arguments refuting what you're saying.
But unfortunately, under advice of my comedians, I'm not playing anymore.

"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience."
~George Carlin

"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
~Mark Twain
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 02:08:21
@JLF- Seriously... Send a copy of that picture to Eli Ozer, the Owner & Webmaster, and ask *him* why it's not acceptable for this website. He *wrote* the rule, and so far, you *seriously* are the only person who has ever not been able to grasp the concept of *seeing* the arch of the foot... not seeing a 'shape' of an arch. It's like posting a pic of a woman's breast through a bra and sweater on a site whose rules state, "Only pictures showing aureolas, nipples or underboob are permitted; bras and shirts aren't really what the site is about." If she had on a cupless bra & see-through shirt, FINE. Otherwise, no. Even though 'breast' may be a shape to you.

For our purposes, 'arch' is not a shape, but a part of a foot that you need to be able to SEE. And Twain is right. Of all the Guild members here including Devoted Guilders, Guild Knights and Trusted Uploaders, I'm the only person here foolish enough to have been baited into even discussing this with you. I'm done. As I said, write the Admin; he's the one who *made* up the stupid rules here. If I had a website, I'd probably welcome that picture, and nobody would be able to remove it except me if I wanted to, because it'd be my website.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 02:21:31
@Mr Hate>"It is simple folks and if you can't follow them than you have proven the simplest of tasks here are far to complex for you."

Or as Daddy Black used to say, "He couldn't pour piss out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel."
Blacklist user
Reply
Templar97  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 04:20:13
@JamieLikesFeet- Has anyone ever conveyed what a belligerent, impudent person you are??
Let it go. Listen to the sensible counseling coming from these seasoned WF users.
Don't be a fool. Be intelligent, please.

And, yes, I WILL bite on this subject.
Blacklist user
Reply
Templar97  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 04:37:02
Let's take this through a logical system of proof.

What defines "seeing toes, soles, or arches"? How is that qualified? How do you discern between seeing a physical foot and seeing the shape or 'outline' of a foot (Call it what you will... You could refer to the arch and outer aspect as the 'contour' of the foot)?? I'll tell you.

Firstly, you are conflating socks and shoes in your 'intellectual thesis' on foot philosophy. Admittedly, they are in the same category in that they both CONCEAL parts of the foot. Were someone to upload a photo of a celebrity in a pair of those 'toeless socks', I believe the consensus would be in favor of allowing that photo to stay. It's legit *because of the fact* that the toe flesh, itself, is on open display. That is an obvious and elementary exception to the sock rule.

Any item of footwear that allows DEFINED exposure of the toes, soles, or arches is deemed a legal upload. Simple, basic, and concise. Don't over-intellectualize something that is SO BASIC.

"Thanks for flying WikiFeet!" ~ Toe (A truly intelligent man)
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 04:44:03
>" Were someone to upload a photo of a celebrity in a pair of those 'toeless socks', I believe the consensus would be in favor of allowing that photo to stay."

http://pics.wikifeet.com/Jaimie-Alexander-Feet-1312593.jpg

Uploaded 04/28/14. Never reported, still in gallery.
I hate that pic, but it is one of the most popular pics in her gallery.
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 04:48:21
I love women in toeless socks!
Blacklist user
Reply
Templar97  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 04:52:18
@footsie- I don't mind those, but I would take a lady in a pair of sexy sheer nylons over socks any day of the week.
I'm quite the kinky young man in that regard. Love me a shapely lady in full lingerie & heels!
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 04:58:07
Lingerie stockings are sexier then socks! I love me both!!!😁
Blacklist user
Reply
JamieLikesFeet  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 09:58:27
@Templar97 How delusional do you have to be to believe that I'm the one portraying myself in an unintelligent manner, when in fact, all I'm doing is asking a relevant question that clearly has you all trumped?

I'll ask again.

If one of the site's prerequisites for uploading a picture is "arches", and the arch of the foot is a shape which can one-hundred-percent be seen through socks and hosiery, then why are pictures of that description immediately removed? Flesh isn't a necessary condition to be able to see the arch of someone's foot, but if that's what the site wants then it needs to be in the guidelines to avoid future mis-uploads. That's why this is important.

I have absolutely no interest in anything you type unless it's in relation to the above question.
Blacklist user
Reply
JamieLikesFeet  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-22 10:02:11
@BackInBlack60 No one’s asking you to play. I’m providing sound logic to eloquently state what I think is wrong with the site. You’re unable to construct a sensible counter argument, but instead of just letting it go like a normal person, your ego doesn’t allow it, so the option you’re left with is to respond with ad hominem attacks with barely any substance in the hopes that any casual reader will consider you victorious. And that’s what we’re seeing now. You’re a typical troll.

Any unbiased person with an ounce of reading comprehension will be able to determine who the real fools are here.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 16:59:08
@JLF> "ad hominem" Dude, I took college-level debate & logic courses too, and you really left me no choice other than to question your intelligence or logic, since your own 'logical' points were so convoluted (and you seem to be deluded about that).

I laid out the simple logic that it's not *our* rule, and you are the *only* person ever in the history of the site who cannot understand this simple rule that "Toes, soles or arches must be *showing.* But *just* for your benefit, in the new rules we're drafting, we will now modify it to say something like "BARE skin or *skin* (not outlines of shapes) clearly visible through *sheer* or see-through materials."

Here's a 'short list' of your logical fallacies: anecdotal fallacy, argument from fallacy, affirming the consequent and/or false analolgy (Shoe vs. socks argument), argumentum ad lapidem, argumentum ad ignorantiam, argument from personal incredulity, begging the question, cherry picking, shifting burden of proof, circulus in demonstrando, continuum fallacy, fallacy of composition, fallacy of division, false attribution, false dichotomy, red herring, straw man, two wrongs make a right, special pleading, et al.

The *biggest* flaw is equivocation and/or referential fallacy... simply the *wrong* definition of the word 'arch' when there are two (shape vs. foot part named for the shape)

And now this one... argumentum ad infinitum
But not anymore, at least, not from *this* boy.

OK??? Your only other options if you *want* pics like these on what is *essentially* a site for bare feet (when possible), the only other options open to you are:

1) Use 'Contact Us' to ask the Site Owner/Webmaster to *modify* the policy (and I guarantee 100% he will not)
--or--
2) Join Guild, and post a poll (or ask someone who is able to post it for you; requires 10k Guild Exp points) with a link to this every photo, asking if people would prefer to allow pics like this in the future.

On that one, I can tell you that we ran a poll about *visible* "toe cleavage" with the rest of the foot covered by pumps, and that idea went down in flames, so I also guarantee almost nobody here wants pictures of socks. As is stated in the rules.

In other words, "Agumentum Ad Populum" ain't-a gonna hep ya none, neither.

"Thank you for flying Wikifeet, and have a *nice* day!" ~@Toe

@Toe- Maybe you're *right* about that 'last word' thing! ;)
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 17:12:08
As if anyone else but Jamie really cares, the pictures in question are:

#2130727 & 2130746

Oh, and @Jamie... BTW, in your little "Diagram for Dummies" here:

http://pics.wikifeet.com/Jennifer-Aniston-Feet-2130745.jpg

the arrow pointing to her *left* foot points to the *blade* of the foot, not the *arch!* (Well, actually both arrows point to *socks!*)
Blacklist user
Reply
  Iluvfeet  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:10:40
After cracking up from seeing pics #2130727 & 2130746, I've decide on @JLF's behalf, we should organize a trip to the Gateway Arch in St. Louis to satisfy our appreciation of women's feet. The low budget trip will be to your local McDonald's.
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:19:07
@ilf. Not the local McDonald's ilf you might want to visit the McDonald's river boat!
Blacklist user
Reply
  Iluvfeet  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:20:48
@ffr - are there arches?
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:30:39
At the mrb you will usually find a set of Arch's or two!
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:35:27
I've been up in the St. Louis Arch, but heard they cover it with a sock during the winter.
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:37:24
They put a black stocking on it on Valentine's day!
Blacklist user
Reply
  Iluvfeet  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:45:13
A sock is fine, I just need to see the shape. Lol
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 19:50:41
Maybe @JLF should 'put a sock *in* it!'
(:^p)

But hey, s/he has projected 'troll' upon me, so I'll do likewise now.
Blacklist user
Reply
Templar97  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-25 22:57:45
So, I will walk out on a limb here and say that @JLF's ignorance and insistence is much like the "Rage Cage" in this gem of a clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xkMPOmn7WA
Blacklist user
Reply
Toe  (user)  -  rated (nice feet)2016-02-26 06:05:48
Or classic trolling at it's most definitive state. Comes in, starts conversation, then casually flames anyone who dares to disagree. All this despite the rules that have been relaxed a little by the Creator. Everybody give @JLF an inch. They will take the mile. 😹
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-27 03:27:22
@Toe- "Give a man an inch... and right away, he thinks he's a ruler!" ~Maxwell Smart
Blacklist user
Reply
  Iluvfeet  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-02-27 03:43:08
Give @JLF an inch and he'll take a foot, even if it's sock covered.
Blacklist user
Reply
JamieIikesFeet  (user)2016-03-01 08:58:09
My points were convoluted, were they? My only argument was that the arch of the foot is visible through socks, but that's of such complexity that you find it too difficult to follow? On the topic of intelligence, that's something you're willing to freely admit?

It's beside the point whose rule it is. The rule isn't the issue here; it's the user's misinterpretation of it, making this the optimal place to share my opinion (even if it's not wanted). See, despite what you believe, the arch of the foot isn't coincidentally named that way. It is an actual arch that's formed by bones, ligaments and tendons. If not the curvature of the foot, then what is it that you consider the visible arch?

Now, considering I can't fathom a sensible answer to that question, I'm going to make the safe assumption that you can't either. In that likely event, save yourself the embarrassment and let's just settle on the idea that the visible arch of the foot (a prerequisite for uploading to this site) is, in fact, the ach-like shape.

With that cleared, let's go over a couple of unconvoluted questions.

1) Can the arch be seen and assessed through socks? Yes!

2) Does that mean that the picture in question was in compliance with the rules in their current state, but yet falsely reported and removed by the community? Yes!

"Your only other options if you *want* pics like these"

Since you're a fan of the jargon, nice straw man fallacy there. I couldn't give a shit whether the picture's on the site or not. That's not what this argument has ever been about. I'm pointing out the confliction between what the rules deem acceptable opposed to what the community does/doesn't. Before you repeat it again, it's completely irrelevant if I'm the first to draw attention to this matter. It's something that I feel needs to be addressed in order to avoid frustrating legitimate uploaders who actually read and interpret the rules correctly.

But I don't need to convince you of that anymore, ey? The fact that the rules are in the process of a reform means that at least some of you agree with me, because we both know that keeping me happy is the very least of your concerns. Nice try, though.

@Toe I'm pretty sure after a little scroll up you'll find that I was flamed multiple times before I returned any fire. It was a calm discussion before BIB unnecessarily resorted to aggression because he couldn't admit that I had a point.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 04:48:18
*bump* for @Keeper...
Who will say, "You know I can't read ALL THAT!"
(:^p)
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-21 13:12:20Lucic17x  (user)  -  rated (nice feet)
Removed: Duplicate
She was just voted the most Beautiful Woman in Hollywood. Does anyone agree? I mean she is sexy absolutely but there surely are more deserving of that title. I wouldn't even say she's the best Jennifer in Hollywood.
 
Reply
Blacklist user
Dadramel  (user)  -  rated (bad feet)2016-04-21 13:27:59
She'd be the prettiest girl in the hood but not in the whole school ;p
Blacklist user
Reply
Elway  (user)  -  rated (nice feet)2016-04-21 13:53:45
Things like that are so subjective, I tend to just ignore them. Jennifer does, however, deserve something. She "burst on the scene" with Friends becoming the breakout star and a sex symbol of the mid 90s. She's kept her A game ever since; over 20 years. She has aged gracefully and looks amazing at 47.
Blacklist user
Reply
Lucic17x  (user)  -  rated (nice feet)2016-04-21 15:05:14
She was insanely beautiful in Friends I'll admit that. She has aged well but she's had surgery too and for me that kinda makes her invalid for the most beautiful title.
Blacklist user
Reply
Lucic17x  (user)  -  rated (nice feet)2016-04-21 15:45:42
What's with all the troll accounts?
Blacklist user
Reply
Kawen Mr Jeyt  (user)2016-04-21 15:46:03
Handreds (underrated) of celebs in this site have better feet than Selena
Blacklist user
Reply
Lucic17x  (user)  -  rated (nice feet)2016-04-21 15:54:01
^^ I agree there are many underrated but Selena has great feet that cannot be denied.
Blacklist user
Reply
HappyEvilDude  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-21 22:52:16
I might give her "World's Most Beautiful 47 year old Jennifer"
Blacklist user
Reply
joker777  (user)2016-04-21 22:55:44
Thought u said most beautiful 47 yo. Naomi Watts looks better IMO.
Blacklist user
Reply
Toesnheels  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 00:55:56
As I've said before, beauty is in the eye of the foot-holder, and I'd like my turn now, please.
Blacklist user
Reply
  BackInBlack60  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 03:53:43
@LucicX>"She was just voted the most Beautiful Woman in Hollywood. Does anyone agree?"

I do, pretty much. I mean, yeah, lotta competition and 'what @Elway said' and all, but she is *certainly* worthy of... attention and is beautiful, classy, has aged well, etc. I love her more *now* that in her 'Friends' days, and she ages like a fine wine. (Something you'll understand if you live as long as I now have).
Blacklist user
Reply
  footsiefoot reborn  (guild knight)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-22 04:07:14
She's definitely a beautiful lady!
Blacklist user
Reply
2016-04-22 03:10:26AnonSide  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Removed: Duplicate
Please god let there be a HQ version of this!
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-04-22 03:08:52AnonSide  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Wow! What a beautiful picture of Jen and her yummy feet!! So great to see her soles :P
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-04-22 00:58:39Toesnheels  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Sometimes a picture turns up that makes me think someone's looking down on me, knows I've had a hard day, and wants to turn my day right around. This is just such a pic.
Delicious, perfect soles.
 
Reply
Blacklist user
2016-04-21 15:25:19LongWalk  (trusted uploader)  -  rated (beautiful feet)
Removed: Duplicate
My God!! Can't wait for a hi-res version so I can have this as my Windows wallpaper.
 
Reply
Blacklist user
Silver89  (user)  -  rated (beautiful feet)2016-04-21 22:29:02
agree
Blacklist user
Reply
439 wall posts left